INTERACTION AMONGST VARIOUS ORGANS

Political And Permanent Executive

The interaction and relationship flanked by the political executive, that is, the ministry and the permanent executive, that is, the bureaucracy in framing policies is both qualitative and quantitative. The focus of discussion here would be on interaction flanked by these two wings. It has been discussed earlier that the permanent executive assists the political executive in preparing policy proposals and also suggesting and analyzing several dissimilar alternatives to a scrupulous issue at hand to be translated into a public policy. In the making of policy proposals, which are the basis of the policies, the permanent executive works in a well planned and thoughtful manner with the political executive. Gone are the days when policy formulation was measured to be the sole domain of political executive. Because of the changing technological and scientific developments, the expertise of the permanent executive has become approximately essential for putting through the right type of choices, clauses, and dimensions of dissimilar policies. Besides providing the information through data (composed on several issues) to be incorporated in a policy proposal, the permanent executive perform the suggestive role through putting several suggestions before the political

executive. It also interacts with the political executive in policy making when it analyzes the several alternatives accessible for making a policy and puts it before the political executive. Therefore, it becomes apparent that the permanent executive has a major role in policy making. But this role is performed through method of its interaction with the political executive; ft does not mean that the permanent executive has predominance in excess of the political executive. They both work hand in glove with each other for giving a proposal a final form.

Primarily there are two significant activities involved in policy formulation. Firstly, the decision concerning what is to be done, and secondly, the method it is to be done. Normally, in the first activity the major role is that of the political executive and with regard to the second, the permanent executive performs the significant role. Of course, in both the activities one takes help and guidance of each other. Furthermore, the permanent executive is under the direct control of political executive which in turn is accountable to the legislature. This means that permanent executive has an indirect interaction with legislature but direct interaction with political executive.

Parliament And Permanent Executive

It will be better if we clarify at this point that the relationship flanked by the Parliament and the executive cannot be discussed under watertight categories of relationship flanked by the Parliament and the political executive and the Parliament and the permanent executive. The three that is the Parliament, permanent executive and political executive interact closely with each other in the process of policy making. The political executive, in its role of identifying policy issues and concretizing them into policy proposals, is helped a great deal through the permanent executive, which does a lot of spade work for the political executive. It performs the informative, suggestive and analytical roles in order to help the political executive in substantiating the policy proposals and collecting the relevant data. The political executive employs a vast staff consisting of administrators, experts, technicians,

scientists, specialists and ordinary workers to carry out the tasks assigned to it. With the augment in the functions of the government in the field of economic and social well being of the people, the responsibilities of the government have greatly expanded and so has the staff working under the government. The government machinery and the bureaucracy have become intricate and too elaborate, and the responsibility of the council of ministers has consequently, increased. This has, in turn, led to an augment in the parliamentary work. The administrative tools, that is the bureaucracy which is employed to implement the task assigned to it, also helps the council of ministers in formulation of their policies, which are eventually approved through the Parliament. Therefore the three organs, the Parliament, Cabinet and council of ministers and bureaucracy are constantly helping one another in the process of arriving at decisions.

Because the permanent executive works intimately with the council of ministers and is in fact the major instrument for carrying out the policies of the political executive approved through the Parliament, it is through the council of ministers that their accountability to the Parliament is discharged. It is the minister who in the ultimate analysis, has to take the blame for any failure, deficiency, delay, mistake or irregularity on the part of the administration. So, the permanent executive is under heavy responsibility, it has to be careful, alert, watchful, honest and efficient and a lot of burden falls on the council of ministers to carry out the systematic supervision of the administration which is the permanent executive.

One significant point which should be taken into account is the discussions and development of the party meetings which power the political executive more in shaping its policies or responding to public opinions. Its impact on the administration is no less significant than the impact of the Parliament, though the permanent executive is not directly accountable to the party in power, but indirectly the criticism it suffers at the party hands reflects itself on the floor of the House and gets canalized through dissimilar parliamentary procedures through which the permanent executive is called to account.

A very significant device through which the Parliament interacts with the bureaucracy or the permanent executive is through delegated legislation. We will now try to discuss the importance of delegated legislation and the development of delegated legislation in India.

Pressure upon the parliamentary time: the large volume of legislative business creates of essential for the Parliament to enact laws, embodying broad principles, leaving details to be supplied through the executive departments.

Scientific and technical character of the subject matter: As the Parliament is a body of laypersons, it is not able to handle the scientific and technical characteristics underlying the policies and yet, such matters are significant parts of the legislative enactments. The Parliament, not being an apt body to deal with details which are technical, delegates them to the executive.

Need to secure flexibility: need for allowing for rapid adjustments to meet the local circumstances results in delegating legislative power to the executive.

Need to give for unforeseen contingencies: to cope with contingencies such as war, economic crises, etc., the government needs to take quick action. It cannot wait until the Parliament passes a law authorizing necessary action, for in an emergency that is neither practicable nor sensible. Consequently, the Parliament grants legislative power to the executive.

Delegated legislation has become the need of the hour; otherwise, it will be very hard for the Parliament to enact the number of legislations needed to meet the challenges posed through the changing social, economic and political scenario. The effectiveness of the parliamentary control in excess of the executive is determined through three significant circumstances. Firstly, as a matter of principle, legislatures can be effective in its conduct in excess of the executive only in proportion to the strength of the opposition, which through virtue of its strength and appeal to the electorate, expects that some day it

would have a chance to form the government, that is, it should be “a Cabinet of the future”. In the Indian parliamentary system if the legislature has not quite succeeded in creating institutions and procedures for more effective control in excess of the executive, it is partly due to the dominating position of the Congress party in the Parliament and partly due to the subsistence of an opposition that has not been able to perform a strong and assertive role.

Secondly, the effectiveness of such control also depends upon the strength and excellence of the public opinion. Representative legislatures backed through strong public opinion can effectively control executive and administrative action. Public opinion controls the executive, both through independent expression of opinion on public issues, backing or opposing the legislature in its attitude towards the executive, and also at the time of elections through choosing such people who would be honest and fearless in analyzing governmental actions. Thirdly, the effectiveness of the legislative control in excess of the executive depends upon the devices and procedures instituted through the legislature in carrying out its functions to meet the changing needs of modem society. Though, legislative procedures are only a means to an end, the end being responsible and democratic discussion of public issues in the Parliament. Care, therefore, has to be taken to develop effective check and supervision in excess of governmental actions, and not to curb the initiative and quickness of the executive for vital decisions.

Parliament And The Political Executive

Constitutionally and in practice, the Parliament and the political executive in India share a very significant relationship. We have also discussed the role of the political executive, that is, the Prime Minister, the Cabinet, cabinet committees, cabinet secretariat and the Prime Minister‟s secretariat in policy making. A crucial facet of this relationship flanked by the Parliament and the political executive is the practice of ministerial responsibility. Under Article 75(3) of the Constitution of India, the council of ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. So long as the executive commands majority

support in the Lok Sabha, the executive in a very legitimate manner is entitled to control the legislature. Although the council of ministers is appointed through the President, all ministers have to be members of the Parliament and if a minister is not a member of the Parliament at the time of his/her appointment, he/she has to become a member within a period of six months, otherwise, he/she would cease to be a minister. The council is a grand committee of the Parliament charged with the duty of conducting the executive affairs of the government. It is this relationship which is crucial to their role in policy making, and determines the whole course of parliamentary control in excess of the political executive. Initiative rests in the council of ministers to bring forward legislative and financial proposals before the Parliament, and the role of the Parliament is one of judging the potential of the proposals, the validity of factors on which they are based and their capability to achieve the objectives.

While the policy is in the stage of formulation, it is the executive which considers it and provides it a concrete form. The Parliament‟s role begins only after the proposal is placed before it for approval. Therefore, the council of ministers and the Parliament are closely interlinked, but still there is a clear distinction flanked by their functions. The close association of the Parliament and the executive is one of the most significant features of the parliamentary system. Whatever activity the Parliament is occupied in at any time, be it legislative, ventilation of the grievances of the people, voting of supplies, discussion of matters of urgent public importance, the executive is always involved. The relationship flanked by the executive and the Parliament is one of inter-dependence based on mutual trust and confidence. Though the executive has vast freedom in shaping policies and taking steps to implement them, the Parliament has the right to call for information and to oversee whether the executive has acted in accordance with their obligations and utilized the powers conferred on them for the purpose for which they were planned.

Parliament. It always has to be prepared to face parliamentary scrutiny. Important occasions for review are provided through discussion on Motion of Thanks on the President‟s Address and the Budget including Demands for Grants from several ministries and departments and the proposals to raise funds for meeting expenditure. Separately from these, specific matters may be discussed through motions on matter of urgent public importance, private members resolutions and other substantive motions. Discussions can also take place on motions for modification of statutory rules and on annual reports of departments and public undertakings; and government actions in specific fields discussed or local troubles aired through cut motions. In extreme cases, a motion of no confidence can be moved against the government.

Some of the other specific procedural devices executed for parliamentary surveillance in excess of the executive contain laying of papers on the Table of the House, Questions, Half an Hour Discussions, Calling Attention Motion, Short Duration Discussions, Adjournment Motions, etc. Let us discuss these briefly. As we know that the minister has to respond to any question raised through the member of Parliament. The permanent executive helps in preparation of these responses; the executive creates accessible information to the Parliament through placing papers on the Table. As the papers so placed may all of a sudden become public documents and may even lead to a debate or discussion in the House, the executive has to be very vigilant in the preparation and presentation of papers. Parliamentary questions which are tabled for answers are significant devices through which information is sought from the government on the floor of the House. Throughout the question hour, the administration is made accountable to the members of the Parliament for its actions and non-actions and at times the administration may have to even spell out the proposed future course of action in certain significant matters. All characteristics of administration come under the vigilant eye of the Parliament throughout the question hour. The minister concerned has to be prepared for any type of query on the floor of the House. There can be supplementary questions which in the name of seeking information may actually be directed at detecting lapses of the government.

There also exists a provision for half an hour discussion in the House in case of inconclusive or unsatisfactory answers when the matter involved is one of enough public importance. We also have a procedure of motion of adjournment. This helps in discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance which can be moved with the consent of the speaker. The purpose of an adjournment motion is to take the government to task for a recent act of omission or commission having serious consequence, its adoption is regarded as amounting to a sort of censure on the government. The Calling Attention Motion is another device which enables the members to draw the attention of the government to any sudden development and public importance. This is essentially an Indian innovation and a member may, with the previous permission of the speaker, call the attention of a minister to any matter of urgent public importance and request the minister to create a statement on the subject.

One of the most effective methods through which the Parliament exercises check in excess of the executive is through its control in excess of finance. The executive decides how much revenue is to be raised or what the desired stage of expenditure should be, and once the Parliament votes the revenues and disbursements, the executive cannot deviate from the Parliamentary sanctions. For any excess amount spent, the executive has to seek regularization through the Parliament. And for Parliament to regularize such excess, the executive has to provide proper explanations. Likewise, throughout the budget discussion, the executive comes under close parliamentary scrutiny. It is not only the ministers, but also the departments and the several subordinate offices under them that are involved and the final sanction of money can be decided only after thorough discussion and evaluation of their activities throughout the year. Another device through which the Parliament keeps effective surveillance in excess of executive are the committees. In the area of finance, through financial committees.

Parliament And The Judiciary

While making policies, the Parliament has to keep in view the judicial pronouncements and rulings. The judicial role in relation to the Parliament assumes importance because of three factors, firstly, the power of the judiciary to interpret the parliamentary legislation, to provide meaning to the words used in a Statute, and to fill in the gaps, secondly, the judicial power to declare a statute unconstitutional and thirdly, the power of the courts to invalidate constitutional amendments. The power of the judiciary to look at the validity of legislation depends upon two factors. Firstly, it should have the power to provide remedy to the individual approaching the court to challenge the validity of a statute, and secondly, the language and the dimension of the constitutional provisions against which the validity of the Statute is to be judged. As regards the first factor, the Constitution of India incorporates judicial remedies in itself, instead of leaving the matter to the legislature‟s will. These remedies are primarily contained in Article 32 and 226. Article 32 empowers the Supreme Court to issue prerogative writs for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose. Therefore a person challenging the validity of a Statute against a Fundamental Right may either go directly to the Supreme Court or to the High Court. For violation of any other constitutional provision through a Statute, the individual will have the remedy of approaching the High Court first and then going to the Supreme Court through method of appeal.

The forty-second amendment of the Constitution, 1976, attempted to dilute these remedies in two methods. Firstly, the Supreme Court under Article 32 was to consider only the constitutionality of a central law and not a state law and the High Court was to confine itself to consider the validity of a state law. The Supreme Court had, though, the authority to decide upon the validity of a state law in its appellate jurisdiction.

The most significant device of supplying power to the judiciary to invalidate a Statute is provided through the fundamental Rights. Most of the

cases of constitutional validity have arisen under Articles 14, 19 and 31. One thing more is to be measured in the relationship flanked by the legislature and judiciary, and that is the power of the judicial review given to the Supreme Court under a written Constitution, the power of judicial review in excess of the legislative enactments is to be conceded. Though, since it is a question of invalidating an Act passed through the representative of the people, superior in conditions of number as compared with the judges, there is the necessity of judicial self-restraint in such a matter. The court has to illustrate due respect to the legislative determination and strike down a Statute when it is quite clear